CarMag Review is LIVE: Armada NISMO vs. Sequoia TRD Pro (fictional)

T

TrailHybrid

New member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Fort Lauderdale
Well, the review we've all been waiting for just dropped on the CarMag website. It's the first full head-to-head instrumented test, and the numbers are... something else. I've summarized their key findings below.

THE NUMBERS:
  • 0-60 mph:
    • Armada NISMO: 5.3 seconds
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 5.8 seconds
  • Quarter Mile:
    • Armada NISMO: 13.9 sec @ 100 mph
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 14.4 sec @ 96 mph
  • Braking, 60-0 mph:
    • Armada NISMO: 121 feet
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 134 feet
  • Figure-Eight Test:
    • Armada NISMO: 26.1 sec @ 0.71 g (avg)
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 27.8 sec @ 0.64 g (avg)
THE SUBJECTIVE VERDICT:
  • On-Road Champ: Unanimous win for the Armada NISMO. They called its acceleration "shockingly aggressive" and said it "handles with a flatness that defies its size," praising the responsive steering and NISMO-tuned transmission.
  • Off-Road King: Clear win for the Sequoia TRD Pro. The review highlighted its superior suspension articulation with the FOX shocks and the utility of its various off-road modes and camera angles.
  • Towing: Slight edge to the Sequoia for its higher official capacity and the low-end torque of the hybrid system, but they noted the NISMO felt "incredibly stable and confident" with a 7,000 lb trailer, praising its bigger brakes.
  • Comfort & Interior: A total toss-up. They loved the NISMO's sport seats but called the ride "unforgiving" on broken pavement and said the interior didn't feel special enough. They liked the Sequoia's big screen but criticized the amount of hard plastic and the compromised third-row legroom.
FINAL QUOTE: "There is no single winner here, only a clear choice based on priorities. The Sequoia TRD Pro is an immensely capable and versatile family adventure rig that leans into its truck roots. The Armada NISMO is a three-row sport truck, plain and simple. It sacrifices cushy comfort for on-road performance that has no business being this good in a vehicle this big."

I have to be honest, this wouldn't make my decision any easier. The numbers on the NISMO would be intoxicating, but the reviewer's comments on the harsh ride for daily driving would have me worried.
 
This would be awesome!

Look at those numbers! A half-second faster to 60 mph? A half-second faster in the quarter mile? A full TEN FEET shorter braking distance? That's not just a small difference; that is a complete domination in every single performance metric. A figure-eight result like this would prove it wouldn't just be a straight-line brute, either—it would actually hand really well.

Hopefully this turns out to be, well, at least close. And in that case, people are worried about a "harsh" ride? That's not a bug; it's a feature! That's what a NISMO product is supposed to feel like. It's connected to the road. You want a floating couch? Don't buy the NISMO Armada. You want a three-row SUV that can embarrass sports cars, you buy this. If reviews like this actually come to fruition. they'd cement my decision 100%.
 
I don't know, man, I see a twin-turbo V6 being stressed to its absolute limit to produce numbers for a magazine, and a ride described as "unforgiving." So, they made it faster, less comfortable, and undoubtedly less reliable in the long run. Congratulations.

What good is being a half-second faster to 60 if your family is miserable and your back hurts after every drive? My V8 is smooth, comfortable, and has more than enough power for the real world. A review like this would prove that Nissan sacrificed the Armada's best quality - its comfortable ride - for the sake of bragging rights. I'd see this as a huge loss for what the Armada is supposed to represent - which is an affordable entry into the full size near-luxury SUV segment with reasonable expectations for reliability and longevity.
 
TrailHybrid said:
Well, the review we've all been waiting for just dropped on the CarMag website. It's the first full head-to-head instrumented test, and the numbers are... something else. I've summarized their key findings below.

THE NUMBERS:
  • 0-60 mph:
    • Armada NISMO: 5.3 seconds
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 5.8 seconds
  • Quarter Mile:
    • Armada NISMO: 13.9 sec @ 100 mph
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 14.4 sec @ 96 mph
  • Braking, 60-0 mph:
    • Armada NISMO: 121 feet
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 134 feet
  • Figure-Eight Test:
    • Armada NISMO: 26.1 sec @ 0.71 g (avg)
    • Sequoia TRD Pro: 27.8 sec @ 0.64 g (avg)
THE SUBJECTIVE VERDICT:
  • On-Road Champ: Unanimous win for the Armada NISMO. They called its acceleration "shockingly aggressive" and said it "handles with a flatness that defies its size," praising the responsive steering and NISMO-tuned transmission.
  • Off-Road King: Clear win for the Sequoia TRD Pro. The review highlighted its superior suspension articulation with the FOX shocks and the utility of its various off-road modes and camera angles.
  • Towing: Slight edge to the Sequoia for its higher official capacity and the low-end torque of the hybrid system, but they noted the NISMO felt "incredibly stable and confident" with a 7,000 lb trailer, praising its bigger brakes.
  • Comfort & Interior: A total toss-up. They loved the NISMO's sport seats but called the ride "unforgiving" on broken pavement and said the interior didn't feel special enough. They liked the Sequoia's big screen but criticized the amount of hard plastic and the compromised third-row legroom.
FINAL QUOTE: "There is no single winner here, only a clear choice based on priorities. The Sequoia TRD Pro is an immensely capable and versatile family adventure rig that leans into its truck roots. The Armada NISMO is a three-row sport truck, plain and simple. It sacrifices cushy comfort for on-road performance that has no business being this good in a vehicle this big."

I have to be honest, this wouldn't make my decision any easier. The numbers on the NISMO would be intoxicating, but the reviewer's comments on the harsh ride for daily driving would have me worried.
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing this thoughtful preview at what we can expect. A review like this would be very illuminating and, frankly, confirm exactly what I've been saying.

The NISMO is a one-dimensional performance vehicle. It's fast, yes, but at what cost? An "unforgiving" ride and an interior that "doesn't feel special enough." This is the compromise you make when you don't engineer the vehicle holistically from the ground up as a luxury-performance product.

The new QX80, by contrast, is designed to provide potent acceleration and a serene, isolated ride thanks to its air suspension. It delivers a truly premium, bespoke interior. The review would make it clear: the NISMO is a fast truck. The QX80 is a luxury experience. For my money, there's no comparison.
 
It would be impressive performance for a Nissan, I will grant it that. A 5.3-second 0-60 time is respectable.

However, let's maintain some perspective. A stock 2025 BMW X5 M60i, which is not even the full "M" version, does 0-60 mph in 4.2 seconds. Some tests have it even quicker.

So, while the NISMO may have won this specific would-be/will-be(?) comparison against the off-road-focused Toyota, its still operating in a completely different performance tier than the established German SAVs. I'd say enjoy the victory, but understand it's a victory in a different weight class.
 
Back
Top